posted
Aside from the color separation, there is a line where the grey of the pod meets the dark grey of the hull. It seems that structures such as windows are truncated under this line. This could indicate a Pod-like structure. Although, at the location where the pylons meet the secondary hull there is no shadow, or evidence of a support structure that would further indicate a Pod. Actually, it seems that the 'Pod' blends in with the very aft of the secondary hull, suggesting a continual piece.
[Edit: This is of course, if I am indeed King of the Turnips, and incorrectly deduced that a pod structure, if one exists, would be located on the dorsal of the ship. Please continue on.]
------------------ "I WANT A POST VOY SERIES STAR TREK ORIGINAL MESSAGE WAS LOOKING FORWARD NOT LOOKING BACK."
-Darkstar
[This message has been edited by Ultra Magnus (edited March 07, 2001).]
posted
When I originally emailed Okuda for information about the Buran, he told me that the Buran's engineering hull was a 1/2500 Galaxy hull, blended into the back of the saucer. Now, looking at the photo of the Chekov, I believe that Miarecki did the same thing with this model. The "pod" looks to be a flat piece sitting on top of the secondary hull, not hovering above it. This same custom-made piece could also be on the Buran model, which would explain why it looks flat in Gary Perry's pic, and would also explain how Okuda could glue a flat submarine tower to the top of the Buran's hull. Any thoughts?
------------------ Lisa: "Don't you remember the story of Oedipus?" Homer: "Maybe five dollars will refresh my memory." Lisa (angrily): "Oedipus was the story of a man who kills his father and marries his mother!" Homer: "Uggh! Who pays for that wedding?"
posted
Alright, I think I got proof that this isn't a pod. Look at my little checking of the photo, and you'll see that the yellow line is the back end of the nacelle pylons, and the red line is where the "pod" merges with the pylons (a color difference is visible). Where these lines cross, to the left, there is more of the pod. Therefore, the pod's back end curves down BELOW the nacelle pylons, and is therefore attached to them.
------------------ "No, 3 & 6 are mandatory, so you only have to do them if you want"
Alex, fellow classmate, trying to explain an assignment (2/2/01)
posted
359: The argument looks good to me. I hope it indeed is part of the secondary hull, with perhaps the lower part similar to Markus Nee's model. The color difference could just indicate a later modification by Okuda to Miarecki's work, or a different part from another model.
Ben
------------------ Ripley: When we throw the switches, how long before the ship blows? Parker: Ten minutes. Ripley: No bullshit? Parker: If we ain't outta here in ten minutes, we won't need no rocket to fly through space.
posted
All right! Now I have another model to build. I think I am going to go with the two tops theory on Bernd's page. And I have nicer nacelles to put this one too. He he he...
------------------ It doesn't matter if you don't know what you're doing as long as you look good doing it.
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Actually...I thought the "pod" was slung underneath as per Gary perry's pic. But...yeah.
------------------ "Gee, the public whipping didn't quite convey their fascist culture, I need something more straightforward. Ah, leather hats!" --Nimrod, on National Socialism fashion design.
posted
Great ideas here! You can guess it was frustrating to sit on this picture and not get to discuss it seriously with anybody.
359: it *could* be that what is to the lower left of the crossing point of the two lines is not part of the pod, but instead part of the pylon. The color of this little triangle at least appears to be the darker blue of the pylon, not the lighter one of the pod. The "pod" would then still rest flush with the secondary hull, but would not really extend below it.
However, if the pylon in fact is a Galaxy class pylon mounted to a Galaxy class secondary hull, as seems likely, then this little "trailing edge extension" in the horizontal part of the pylon would have to be a customized addition... I'm not sure if Miarecki would have had a reason to make one. The color issue could be just due to lighting and shadows. And I do think the "pod" extends below the pylon level.
If we get to see a better side view of the Challenger, it might indeed turn out that the Challenger aft hull is the same piece as this Springfield dorsal "pod". It would make good sense for some sort of a pre-existing part to be used in both applications.
posted
Can I ask... is there a version of this picture with out the inset photo... I would like to see a new angle of the Cheyenne...
------------------ "Yar, a lesbian? That girl had a sex drive! First, Data in Naked Now, then, in Hide and Q, she hits on Picard! "Oh, if only you weren't the captain..." God! If Denise Crosby hadn't left the series, she'd've slept with the entire senior staff by now!" Jeff Kardde - March 7, 2001
posted
Andrew: That was only put there by Matt. The original photo, as it is on Bernd's site, has the Cheyenne clearly visible.
------------------ "...I know this board in secret, intimate ways which are beyond your comprehension.... Let's just say that people should *not* be telling me what to do; it should always be the other way around." -"Red Quacker", conspiracy theorist and contemporary lunatic
posted
Thanks for that point out... just a little question about Bernd's site... it says that the Renaissance class doesn't have any escape pods!?! Isn't that a little dangerous!?!
------------------ "Yar, a lesbian? That girl had a sex drive! First, Data in Naked Now, then, in Hide and Q, she hits on Picard! "Oh, if only you weren't the captain..." God! If Denise Crosby hadn't left the series, she'd've slept with the entire senior staff by now!" Jeff Kardde - March 7, 2001
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic